[Tfug] Version Control

[Glen Pfeiffer]

On 25 Mar 2013, Bexley Hall wrote:
> I'm reconsidering whether or not to continue with CVS
> or switch to some other CM/VC toolkit. 

Your requirements as I read them are:
- Support any file type without any specific system configuration 
  required.
- Commit from any level of the file hierarchy without knowledge 
  of what is in it.
- Must have centralized storage capability.
- Size of repo should not be limited except by disk space.
- Performance should not be affected by size of repo.
- GUI's available


I assume you have excluded some of the more common revision 
control systems for a reason. For example, Git, Mercurial, 
Subversion, etc. Can you fill us in on why?

With the full realization that there might be valid reasons you 
have not mentioned them, I recommend either Mercurial or Git. Yes 
they are distributed revision control systems, but that does not 
prevent you from configuring it with a centralized "master" 
repository. I believe they both meet all your requirements.

This may not affect my recommendation, but your requirement 
regarding performance is vague. Now, I know you like to write for 
a living, but if you can be more specific with fewer words than 
your average post, that would help me out. Here are some possible 
actions that could be affected by repository size:

- View log
- View status
- Update
- Commit
- Branch
- Merge

Subversion, the natural successor to CVS, does not meet your 
performance requirement unless branching is the only thing you 
care about from the list I provided.

-- 
Glen